EDITORIAL: Judges

Published: Friday, March 29, 2013 at 06:12 PM.

We all have the arrogance to believe we can do other peoples’ jobs better than they can.

How many times have we looked at someone such as a major league baseball umpire or an award-winning chef and said: “I bet I could do that job just as well as that person.”

Of course, it’s not true.

While not all jobs require professional training – true professionals have that designation because they can do things other people can’t do.

It’s why the term “professional politician” is not a compliment. Being a politician should not be a profession and most certainly does not require any skill or knowledge beyond getting elected.

N.C. Speaker of the House Thom Tillis understands this. During a recent talk at a Shelby Rotary Club meeting, Tillis spoke of reminding his members that they didn’t become experts in anything just because they were elected to the legislature. His point was that legislators should rely on the true professionals in various fields to help guide policy.

We all have the arrogance to believe we can do other peoples’ jobs better than they can.

How many times have we looked at someone such as a major league baseball umpire or an award-winning chef and said: “I bet I could do that job just as well as that person.”

Of course, it’s not true.

While not all jobs require professional training – true professionals have that designation because they can do things other people can’t do.

It’s why the term “professional politician” is not a compliment. Being a politician should not be a profession and most certainly does not require any skill or knowledge beyond getting elected.

N.C. Speaker of the House Thom Tillis understands this. During a recent talk at a Shelby Rotary Club meeting, Tillis spoke of reminding his members that they didn’t become experts in anything just because they were elected to the legislature. His point was that legislators should rely on the true professionals in various fields to help guide policy.

These four Republicans are sponsors of House Bill 397. This bill would rewrite the state’s constitution regarding eligibility to be a district court judge. Right now, the only requirement to be appointed or elected a district court judge is to be a licensed attorney.

But HB 397 would amend the constitution thusly: “Constitutional amendment to allow persons to serve as district court judges if they have 10 years of experience as a sheriff, clerk of superior court, or magistrate, or 25 years of experience as a certified law enforcement officer.”

Now, in this space, we try to set a high bar for civility and discourse. You won’t find name-calling or personal attacks in our editorials.

But this bill is just plain idiotic.

We would no more want a 10-year-veteran sheriff deciding a child custody case than we would a district court judge coordinating a SWAT team assault during a hostage crisis.

We would no more want a 25-year-veteran beat cop handling an equitable distribution case than we would a district court judge making a decision on whether or not to use deadly force during a domestic violence call.

We would no more want a 10-year-veteran clerk of court to decide exactly how to apply the law to a 12-year-old juvenile offender than we would a district court judge being responsible for coordinating an entire court docket.

The hubris and arrogance of this bill is alarming.

Now, we understand there is frustration on the left and the right with the judiciary. But this aggravation stems from appellate courts, where the highest friction between the legislative and judicial branches exist. It is here where legislation either survives or is struck down.

In state district court, this kind of turf is rarely traveled upon. Instead, judges are using countless specific areas of the statutes do determine, for example, if a young child should remain in the custody of his drug-addicted father or his prostitute mother.

Fortunately, we are confident that most serving in law enforcement, clerks offices and as magistrates wouldn’t presume to assume they are qualified to preside over the kinds of cases heard in district court.

Make no mistake, there are many example of government licensure run amok – often it’s trade organizations using the government to freeze out competitors.

But when it comes to those making life and death decisions – health providers, law enforcement, military, financial, etc. – having licensure makes perfect sense.

And it’s going to take a lot more than four arrogant politicians to change that.